A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42108
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by warspite1 »

Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:14 pm
warspite1 wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:35 pm
Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 4:28 pm
The same crap, over and over and over.

Try and pay attention: The transfer range (unarmed) of the Betty was 3749 miles. The distance to Maui from Eniwetok is 2813 miles. That gives them 936 miles to spare - if they are flying unarmed. Plenty of range to find the Jap fleet, since they know where it is.

If the winds are such that they can transfer armed, their range is 3132 miles and the distance to Oahu is 2715 miles - 417 miles to spare. If the winds allow it - and they will precede the strike with a test run by a Mavis to check the winds - they will be able to wreak havoc on cruisers and destroyers in Pearl.

The raid will not be canceled after the Bettys pass the point of no return.
warspite1

Let me ensure I have this right.

The raid - and the Japanese decision to be at war with the United States of America, The British Empire and the Dutch - is now dependent on the 48 Bettys?

So in order not to throw away 48 Bettys and over 300 aircrew, if the Bettys are past the point of no return, then EVEN IF THE PEARL HARBOR RAID HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN COMPROMISED, it will still go ahead.

The 1st Air Fleet will now be running headlong into an alerted US but, the raid can't be cancelled.

The fate of Japan rests on whether the Bettys have no landing ground that they can reach.....????

Got to admit, the plan is getting more interesting with each post.
That point of no return is probably reached about the time the raid begins. Certainly long after the raid is launched.
warspite1

The point of no return is LONG before the raid. You are saying Japan's decision to go to war or not rests on the fate of 48 Bettys.....
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42108
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by warspite1 »

Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:11 pm
warspite1 wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:09 pm
Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:01 pm

No. They're chrome. I've identified the planes used. That's all that is necessay.
warspite1

Not at all. WWII was not fought in silos. The units - ships, troops and planes you've removed from one order of battle, the destroyers you've removed from the Japanese destroyer strength to become transports, the units you'vve used differently - were all needed by the Japanese in battles still to come. There is a knock on, there are no free lunches. Name the units in the plan and we can properly assess the damage caused to the Japanese war effort.
The names of units are chrome. Nothing more. All that matters is the planes used and I've identified them. Luzon has been postponed - that frees up lots of stuff for use elsewhere. Other operations will be facilitated by that - not harmed. Even the APDs are returned to general use once the troops on Maui are delivered.
warspite1

I've explained to you very clearly why the allocation of specific units is important to the plan and what happens subsequently.

Right now, without these details you simply have no plan. You can’t say at present whether the Japanese have a large enough destroyer force to cope with all these extra operations you've foisted on them, and having removed more than 10% of the IJN destroyer strength.
Last edited by warspite1 on Sun Dec 11, 2022 6:33 am, edited 2 times in total.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Aurelian
Posts: 4072
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Aurelian »

warspite1 wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 8:04 pm
Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 6:11 pm
warspite1 wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:09 pm warspite1

Not at all. WWII was not fought in silos. The units - ships, troops and planes you've removed from one order of battle, the destroyers you've removed from the Japanese destroyer strength to become transports, the units you'vve used differently - were all needed by the Japanese in battles still to come. There is a knock on, there are no free lunches. Name the units in the plan and we can properly assess the damage caused to the Japanese war effort.
The names of units are chrome. Nothing more. All that matters is the planes used and I've identified them. Luzon has been postponed - that frees up lots of stuff for use elsewhere. Other operations will be facilitated by that - not harmed. Even the APDs are returned to general use once the troops on Maui are delivered.
warspite1

I've explained to you very clearly why the allocation of specific units is important to the plan and what happens subsequently.

Right now, without these details you simply have no plan. You don't even know if the Japanese have a large enough destroyer force to cope with all these extra operations you've foisted on them.
Names of units are chrome..... Picture a sailor assigned to a destroyer. "Which one?" He asks. The detailer says "What's the difference, we don't name them."

See a post of mine above about Japanese APDs. They go to the shipyard, had their stern radically changed, their most effective weapons removed and the depth charges as well. All for the sake of carrying two landing craft that could not land all the troops and their equipment in one go. Then, when they're done, go back to a shipyard which is probably already tied up in new construction/repairing ships. How long will that take?
Building a new PC.
KingHart
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri May 11, 2018 3:03 pm
Location: Detroit VAMC

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by KingHart »

Curtis Lemay wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 5:20 pm
KingHart wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 12:26 am Okay, let me see if I have this right-
You are proposing that Japan send 48 Betty bombers, with no ammo or bomb loads (or fighter escort), on a 2500-mile flight, to an island none of the pilots have ever flown to before, at night, regardless of weather conditions, with nowhere to land when they arrive, out of fuel when they arrive, and in close proximity to both an alerted US carrier and an alerted Pearl Harbor at the end of their flight?
I guess I have to repeat everything special just for you because you can't be asked to read the thread.

The Bettys fly from from Eniwetok - 2715 miles from Oahu and 2813 miles from Maui. The range of the Bettys is 3132 miles fully loaded and 3749 miles unloaded. Depending on the winds - determined by a Mavis prerun check of them - they choose one or the other. If the winds are right, they can transfer loaded and raid Oahu before heading to Maui. If they are not, they can fly direct to Maui, load bombs there and then raid Oahu. They don't arrive at night. And the pathfinders will guide them to Maui.
And you claim it is the US that is "clueless"...
Yep. Ignored radar detection of the raid, a minisub trying to enter the harbor, bungled the ultimatum warning, piled planes together, had no ammo for the AAA, and Washington initially couldn't believe the reports of the raid. Finally, Clark Field had its planes on the ground 9 hours after Pearl.
Please explain - What is your Midway invasion force? / Where do these units come from? / Where is the invasion force during the Pearl Harbor raid? / How are you suppling fuel to all these ships? / Where and how many tankers?
Four battalions from the postponed Luzon invasion. The invasion is synched with the carriers getting to Midway from Pearl. Whatever was used for the Luzon invasion is now available for repurposing, including the Midway op.
Please explain - How are the supplies delivered to Maui after the raid? / Where are the cargo ships during the raid? / Where are the ground crews and their supplies during the raid and how do they get to Maui after the raid? / How are you fueling the cargo ships?
After the raid begins the APDs return to Maui, along with the ground crew ships. All these ships rejoin the raid fleet and are refueled just as they are.
Please explain - Exactly what is the OOB of your Maui invasion? (1 battalion? /2 battalions? 4 battalions?) / What are their objectives? (airfield only? /airfield and port?)
Two battalions. Airfield, port and barracks.
Please explain - How are all the Japanese units informed if an abort is called? / What if the Betty bombers are not informed? How does your abort affect the other Japanese offensives? (Malaya / Borneo)
Code words. By radio.
Sir,
If you would simply answer the questions regarding your plan, it would not be necessary for them to be repeated.

Betty bombers. Let's once again look at your plan for the Betty bombers:
1 - The Japanese did not have an airfield on Eniwetok in December 1941. The airfield was only started in December 0f 1942, and was first used in November 1943. Please explain how you plan to conduct long-range air operations on an atoll with no airfield. There was an airfield on Roi-Namur, and one bomber unit (Nells) and one fighter unit (Claudes) were based there on 7 December. I point this out to try to show you that names are not "chrome", but actually important details in any plan.
2 - The distance from Roi-Namur to Maui is 2500 miles, as I stated in my previous post. The maximum range of the Betty, unloaded and unarmed, is 3176 miles. The extended combat range of the Betty is, however, only 937 miles, with a normal combat range of 748 miles. By the way, these quoted range figures for the Bettys come from a source that you yourself said was an unmatched authority - Gary Grigsby.
3 - Thus, as I said, your planes are arriving with no ammo or bomb load, having flown all night, having used at least 80% of their fuel, and having no certainty of there being anywhere for them to land. The idea is, to use your favorite term, "clueless".

US "cluelessness":
1 - An inexperienced Army lieutenant saw the radar, and believed it to show the flight of dive-bombers due in from Enterprise. A mistake, yes. But certainly not proof that the US was unprepared or "clueless".
2 - The sub was tracked, fired upon, and sunk. Not sure how that is a "clueless" response.
3 - Not sure what "ultimatum warning" you are referring to; given that the Japanese bungled the reception of the 14-point diplomatic missive that was supposed to be delivered prior to the raid, thus insuring the US public would view the raid as an unforgiveable sneak attack, it would seem to be the Japanese who were "clueless".
4 - All ships had ammo for the AAA, within 10-15 minutes of the attack Japanese planes were being targeted.
5 - Please provide any proof whatsoever that Washington could not believe the reports of the attack. Shocked, yes. Stunned into disbelief, no.
6 - The planes on Clark Field were being refueled when a delayed Japanese attack caught them on the ground. Had the attack been delivered as planned, all US planes would have been airborne. That the Japanese got lucky does not make the US "clueless".

Midway invasion:
1 - As I asked before, where is the invasion force during the raid? It is 1300 miles from Pearl Harbor to Midway; where do you sync up at?
2 - What ships are being used to transport the invasion force? It is 2500 miles from Japan to Midway; how are you refueling both KB and this Midway invasion?

Maui invasion:
1 - What do you mean by "ground crew ships"? Previously, you have stated that the only naval forces involved were the historic KB force and 12 APDs. Where do the ground crews ride? Where is all the fuel and bombs for the Bettys? Where is all the fuel for all these ships coming from?
2 - As before, where is the invasion force landing on Maui? How can 2000 Japanese soldiers be landed on an island with a population of 47000 and no one notices?
3 - What is the timeline for the landing and for the capture of both the airfield and port?
4 - Just who are these "pathfinders" you keep referring to? How many are there? How and when did they arrive on Maui? How do the various Japanese forces communicate with the "pathfinders"?

Communications:
1 - Japanese radios were notoriously poor, to the point that some pilots actually removed prior to taking flight. Note that Fuchida, the Pearl Harbor strike leader, did not use his radio to talk to other pilots; the famous "Tora, Tora, Tora" signal was meant for Admiral Nagumo back on the Akagi, not for the planes. He used flares to signal the attack.
2 - The problem with using radio to communicate is that the enemy can intercept the signals. This the US did far better than the Japanese. Why, then, would the Japanese use coded radio transmissions to relay word of an abort, especially when the entire Japanese war offense depends on this raid?

Luzon:
1 - Please explain why you believe the Japanese would totally ignore the US forces on Luzon, and instead invade Midway and attempt a suicidal invasion of Maui? How could your plan possibly benefit Japan's war aims?
2 - You are using 6 battalions in your Maui and Midway invasions. That represents roughly 1/3 of the land forces assigned to attack Luzon. 2 of the battalions will be lost at Maui, and the other 4 stranded and starving on Midway. How do you plan to replace these forces?
3 - How do you plan to proceed with the invasion of Borneo without first having at least attempted to neutralize the US forces on Luzon? You are aware, that sizing the oilfields on Borneo and in the East Indies was the whole point of Japan going to war?
matt3916
Posts: 79
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 10:00 pm

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by matt3916 »

I think the troll is winning.
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Buckrock »

matt3916 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 1:15 am I think the troll is winning.
My therapist suggested I needed to engage more online as it would help me conquer my fear of crossing over bridges.
This was the only sig line I could think of.
User avatar
Torplexed
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Mar 21, 2002 10:37 am
Location: The Pacific

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Torplexed »

matt3916 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 1:15 am I think the troll is winning.
A moderator has pulled this thread over to the side of the road once already for the use of that term. Keep it civil. 8-)
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Buckrock »

KingHart wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 11:29 pm Luzon:
2 - You are using 6 battalions in your Maui and Midway invasions. That represents roughly 1/3 of the land forces assigned to attack Luzon. 2 of the battalions will be lost at Maui, and the other 4 stranded and starving on Midway. How do you plan to replace these forces?
Since The Plan leaves Mac's USAFFE free to complete their full mobilization and deploy where they wish using their large numbers of inter-island transports, the Japanese would also need to use more battalions than historical (two) to ensure they hold Mindanao (Davao) and Mindoro against whatever schemes Mad Mac eventually comes up with. With 48th Div being needed for the DEI operations, I'd suggest the current version of The Plan would have already soaked up close to 100% of the historical IJA battalions originally used on Luzon.

Of course we'll just have to wait for the relevant plan details to confirm this.
This was the only sig line I could think of.
User avatar
Platoonist
Posts: 3042
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 4:53 am
Location: Yoyodyne Propulsion Systems

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Platoonist »

KingHart wrote: Sat Dec 10, 2022 11:29 pm How can 2000 Japanese soldiers be landed on an island with a population of 47000 and no one notices?
Interesting to note that the day after the PH attack in the predawn darkness, a single Japanese sailor, Ensign Kazuo Sakamaki was captured by two National Guardsmen literally at the point where he straggled ashore from his stranded midget sub. The sub was itself spotted by an observation tower after the sun came up. Different islands of course, but it stretches credulity to believe that a multi-battalion invasion conveyed by a flotilla of destroyers wouldn't be a little more obvious to spot than a midget sub and one man.
Image
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17563
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by RangerJoe »

A link to a topographical map of Maui with communities, roads plus a reef mentioned!

https://evols.library.manoa.hawaii.edu/ ... 85/content
Attachments
no sir  i said pirate ship  not a pile of shit.jpg
no sir i said pirate ship not a pile of shit.jpg (43.72 KiB) Viewed 1241 times
Last edited by RangerJoe on Sun Dec 11, 2022 5:54 am, edited 1 time in total.
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17563
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by RangerJoe »

Maui topographic map

https://en-us.topographic-map.com/map-l5s34s/Maui/

A Betty pilot would have to be careful that he would not run into a blizzard or a weaker winter storm!
Attachments
Maui topographical with elevation chart.png
Maui topographical with elevation chart.png (233.31 KiB) Viewed 1239 times
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17563
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by RangerJoe »

As can be seen in this current picture, the jungle around the airfield is very dense and it would be easy to hide the entire Japanese Army in it!

Actually, the area was devoted to sugarcane before.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... aerial.jpg

From:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pu%27unene,_Hawaii
Attachments
Aerial view, from the south, of Puʻunēnē with the old airstrip that is now the dragstrip at Maui Raceway Park.jpg
Aerial view, from the south, of Puʻunēnē with the old airstrip that is now the dragstrip at Maui Raceway Park.jpg (298.2 KiB) Viewed 1233 times
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
sPzAbt653
Posts: 10041
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 7:11 am
Location: east coast, usa

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by sPzAbt653 »

it stretches credulity to believe that a multi-battalion invasion conveyed by a flotilla of destroyers wouldn't be a little more obvious to spot than a midget sub and one man.
I am not picking on you sir, thank you for your quote and please know that this thread is not directed at you. I am just using this statement as one of probably hundreds like it in this thread. We can always find some statistic to support our own opinions. For example, to counter the above claim, 6,939 vessels of various types assaulted an area 25 miles wide with a pre-assault bombardment by 2,200 bombers, airborne landings by 3 divisions, coastal bombing by 1,213 warships, and prior intelligence warnings. Yet thru all of this, the landings were not only successful, but in one area went in unopposed!

Our hobby is Simulations. 'Wargames' if you like. Similar, if not the same in many cases, to the types of 'games' that military's around the world 'play' every day in order to predict outcomes. It would be great to see a Simulation of this threads' stated problems in order to witness an outcome.

P.S.
For any that don't know, Bob is very technically proficient, and to have him participate in a thread such as this [concerning a hypothetical] is a real treat. There should be no room in this thread for folks to stand back from the Simulation Table proclaiming one sides' operations to be incredulous.

When the sky is proposed to be green by one side, the other side should admit that while it appears to be blue, it could in fact be green, and move on. Constantly claiming that the sky could not possibly be green leaves one looking like the German high command on D-Day. ;)
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42108
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by warspite1 »

A question for Pearl Harbor experts please.

I read this on the Combined Fleet website. Never heard this before and don’t know whether this is reliable or not. Does anyone know if this is true?

Quite clearly if the Japanese had serious concerns to this extent about even being able to refuel, then this would surely make ‘the plan’ a non-starter?

Quote
Nagumo's orders from Admiral Yamamoto Isoroku (32), CINC, Combined Fleet, are that if refueling proves impossible in the stormy winter waters of the Northern Pacific, Nagumo is to detach AGAKI, SORYU and HIRYU and his destroyers and make the attack with only KAGA, SHOKAKU and ZUIKAKU that need no refueling.

Interested to know if anyone can shed further light on this.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42108
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by warspite1 »

Another extract from Combined Fleet.

4 December 1941: (Hawaii Time):
N Pacific. Weather conditions worsen. Rough seas cause the Striking Force's destroyers to roll up to 45 degrees. Refueling is cancelled.


So again, if true (and I have no reason to doubt this comment) to add to Nagumo’s concerns about getting the KB to the launch point and properly fuelled - and for there to be the required number of carriers in port - there is the problem of the Maui force being topped up at the required time. Who knows what the weather will be like when the carriers put in an appearance?

Yet more variables, totally beyond the KB’s control, that make the chances of ‘the plan’ even being entertained an ever more remote possibility.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Shellshock
Posts: 568
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 2:23 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Shellshock »

sPzAbt653 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 6:43 am For example, to counter the above claim, 6,939 vessels of various types assaulted an area 25 miles wide with a pre-assault bombardment by 2,200 bombers, airborne landings by 3 divisions, coastal bombing by 1,213 warships, and prior intelligence warnings. Yet thru all of this, the landings were not only successful, but in one area went in unopposed!
The awesome scope of Overlord seems an odd comparison to the stealthy operation being discussed here. Did any of the Normandy beach landings go unnoticed somehow by the Germans? Did several of the regimental combat teams successfully steal ashore at night and hide out in the bocage for a week until an attack signal was broadcast?

I recall there was one famous occasion where the Japanese were able to pull off an amphibious evacuation unnoticed. (Kiska) But, that wasn't difficult to do from an uninhabited island in the Arctic notorious for its enveloping fog and poor weather.
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Buckrock »

warspite1 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 7:29 am A question for Pearl Harbor experts please.

I read this on the Combined Fleet website. Never heard this before and don’t know whether this is reliable or not. Does anyone know if this is true?

Quite clearly if the Japanese had serious concerns to this extent about even being able to refuel, then this would surely make ‘the plan’ a non-starter?

Quote
Nagumo's orders from Admiral Yamamoto Isoroku (32), CINC, Combined Fleet, are that if refueling proves impossible in the stormy winter waters of the Northern Pacific, Nagumo is to detach AGAKI, SORYU and HIRYU and his destroyers and make the attack with only KAGA, SHOKAKU and ZUIKAKU that need no refueling.

Interested to know if anyone can shed further light on this.
It does give you a feel for how the Japanese viewed the type of weather they would expect to be facing in the North Pacific that late in the year. They believed that about 1 in 10 days might allow refueling to occur.

The detaching of Akagi, Soryu amd Hiryu would have only been an extreme case as all three had just had their endurance boosted by about 20% by stuffing them with oil where it normally wouldn't fit. It was the CL and the DDs that were the real concern as if they could not be refueled by about the 2000nm mark, they would be detached and KB would continue on with the mission. For that reason the likelihood of the Mutsuki APDs (requiring about 50% more refueling in the conditions than the fleet DDs) being seen as a good mission fit would have been about nil.

This was mentioned about 30 pages ago but since someone didn't want to detail certain fleet movements between Japan and Hawaii, the topic was politely dropped.
This was the only sig line I could think of.
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Buckrock »

warspite1 wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 7:40 am Another extract from Combined Fleet.

4 December 1941: (Hawaii Time):
N Pacific. Weather conditions worsen. Rough seas cause the Striking Force's destroyers to roll up to 45 degrees. Refueling is cancelled.


So again, if true (and I have no reason to doubt this comment) to add to Nagumo’s concerns about getting the KB to the launch point and properly fuelled - and for there to be the required number of carriers in port - there is the problem of the Maui force being topped up at the required time. Who knows what the weather will be like when the carriers put in an appearance?
It was true but luckily for the Japanese the outward journey coincided with a once in a decade weather event that kicked in a few days out from Japan and provided sea conditions that allowed some measure of refueling on most days. The event was unexpected and seen as "a blessing from Heaven" and lasted until they turned south toward Hawaii. After that the weather slowly worsened into what the Japanese had originally expected, allowing the destroyers only about two refueling opportunities in the next 12 days. The weather was bad enough to send several of the destroyers to the naval yard for repairs upon return.

As for what the weather would have been like had the attack come instead during the weeks after Dec 7th, according to the records of USN TFs operating from north of Hawaii to Midway, it deteriorated during the week after the historical PH and appeared to stay that way for most of the next two weeks (also impacted the efforts to relieve Wake).
This was the only sig line I could think of.
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42108
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by warspite1 »

Buckrock wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 2:19 pm
As for what the weather would have been like had the attack come instead during the weeks after Dec 7th, according to the records of USN TFs operating from north of Hawaii to Midway, it deteriorated during the week after the historical PH and appeared to stay that way for most of the next two weeks (also impacted the efforts to relieve Wake).
warspite1

So things looking pretty bleak for getting the Maui operation underway, and apparently the Midway operation too.....
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Buckrock
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 1:10 am
Location: Not all there

Re: A Japanese invasion of Hawaii

Post by Buckrock »

It's a somewhat odd situation. With some extra tankers the APDs would have probably made it at least across the North Pacific using the historical timeline but the historical planners likely wouldn't have considered sending them in the first place as they didn't know the weather was going to so favorable to refueling. I also wouldn't think the troops would enjoy it had they gone as there were three days in a row (Dec 2nd-4th) where the fleet DDs were recorded rolling from 35 deg up to 47 deg.

Midway is an unknown as bad weather in a general area might simply cause delays until an opportunity to attempt an invasion arises. If we knew when the invasion was supposed to happen, we might be able to answer the question by checking the records of the US units stationed on or near Midway at that time but again that would require details of the plan.
This was the only sig line I could think of.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”